High Court · 2025 on 17 Feb 2025

Judgment

2. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. Heard Shri Anil Tiwari, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Shri Shiv Om Vikram Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the

petitioners, Shri Rahul Agarwal, learned counsel for the private respondents and the learned Standing Counsel for the State.

3. Present petition has been filed primarily for the following reliefs: (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondent No. 2 (District Magistrate) to restore back the complete and peaceful possession of the Petitioner’s residence being Aradhya 19E/13/1, Elgin Road, Lal Bahadur Shastri Marg, Civil Lines, Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh – 211001 after evicting Respondent No. 4 and 5 in exercise of powers conferred by Rule 21(2)(i) and Rule 22(1) of the U.P. Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2014. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondent No. 3 to grant immediate police protection to the Petitioners in exercise of his powers under Rule 22(1) of the U.P. Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2014. (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondent No. 2 and 3 to ensure that the life and property of the Petitioners are secured and protected from the harassment and torture of Respondent No. 4 and 5, including taking measures to restore the access of kitchen, washrooms and dining hall to the Petitioners. (iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondent No. 2 to cancel the sale deed executed in favour of Respondent No. 4 and 5 and cancel the mortgages executed by Respondent No. 4 and 5. 2

4. At the fresh stage, this Court constituted a committee to submit its report with respect to the correctness or otherwise (as may appear) of the facts statement made in the present writ petition on the next date in a sealed cover.

5. Thereafter, the committee constituted by the Court submitted its report. Considering the same, following order was passed on 05.07.2024 :

1. Heard Shri Ayush Mishra, holding brief of Shri Sunil Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Rahul Agarwal along with Shri Varad Nath, learned counsel for respondent no.4.

2. Here it may be noted, respondent no.5 is the wife of respondent no.4.

3. In compliance to the last order, Shri Kunal Ravi Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has produced the report of the committee appointed by the Court, in sealed cover. We have perused the same. Retained on record.

4. The petitioners are the parents of respondent no.4. Respondent no.5 is their daughter-in-law. All parties are residing in the property bearing House No. 19/E/13/1, Elgin Road, Lal Bahadur Shastri Marg, Civil Lines, Allahabad.

5. Claiming protection available to senior citizens, the petitioners have approached the Court for the following relief:- (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondent No.2 (District Magistrate) to restore back the complete and peaceful possession of the Petitioner's residence being Aradhaya 19E/ 13/1, Elgin Road, Lal Bahadur Shastri Marg, Civil Lines, Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh- 211001 after evicting Respondent No.4 and 5 in exercise of powers conferred by Rule 21(2)(i) and Rule 22(1) of the U.P. Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2014. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondents No.3 to grant 3 immediate police protection to the Petitioners in exercise of his powers under Rule 22(1) of the U.P Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2014. (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondent No.2 and 3 to ensure that the life and property of the petitioners are secured and protected from the harassment and torture of Respondent no.4 and 5, including taking measures to restore the access of kitchen, washrooms and dining hall to the petitioners. (iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondent no.2 to cancel the sale deed/ execution in favour of Respondent no.4 and 5 and cancel the mortgages executed by Respondent no.4 and 5. (v) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondent No.3 to hold investigation into the criminal acts of the Respondent No.4 and 5, including but not limited to, taking forceful possession of Petitioner's property, using weapon to intimidate the Petitioner, bringing goons to house for physical harassment, ousting the Petitioner from his own shop, unlawfully mortgaging the property of the Petitioners and verbal and physical abuse of the Petitioners by Respondent No.4 and 5. (vi) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondent No.2 to cancel the license of the weapon in possession of the Petitioner which is continuously being used against the Petitioners for criminal intimidation and harassment.

6. Upon hearing on 03.07.2024, we had passed the below quoted order:-

1. Heard Sri Ayush Mishra, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Sunil Kumar Misra, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Vishal Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State- respondents.

2. Glaring facts have been brought before us. The petitioners who are senior citizens and living in the heart of the city Prayagraj, have made specific/direct allegations of extreme/abject violation of their basic fundamental rights as also rights as senior citizens. Violators are none other than their own son and daughter-in-law. The plight suffered by the petitioners (as described in the writ petition) has been continuous over the last few years. At this stage, the petitioners describe themselves to have been confined to 4 one room with limited or no access to sanitation and food.

3. Though normally, we would have first required the petitioners to approach the District Magistrate through a proper application, at present, that course may not serve the interest of justice and may rather be counter productive to the extent essential time may be lost in that process.

4. Accordingly, by way of an exception drawn in the very peculiar facts, we are entertaining the present petition at this stage.

5. Since no effective order may be passed at an ex parte stage and since time is of essence, we constitute a committee of District Magistrate, Prayagraj; Commissioner of Police, Prayagraj and Chief Medical Officer, Prayagraj who will visit the residential premise of the petitioners at 19E/13/1, Lal Bahadur Shastri Marg, Civil Lines, Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh today before 8:00 p.m.

6. If any member of the committee constituted is not available today, the officer holding charge (for the day) shall participate in the proceeding.

7. The committee shall ensure that the petitioners have adequate access to the various portions/rooms of their property as may ensure their safety and peaceful existence during pendency of this writ petition. If required the Commissioner of Police may post necessary personnel at the residence of the petitioners.

8. The Chief Medical Officer shall offer complete medical checkup to the petitioners and ensure adequate medical help may be available to the petitioners through phone call or such means as the petitioners may be in need of.

9. The committee may also make necessary enquiries from the neighbours and/or persons who may be in know of the facts as alleged.

10. The committee shall submit its report with respect to the correctness or otherwise (as may appear) of the facts statement made in the present writ petition on the next date, in a sealed cover.

11. Put up as fresh on 05.07.2024.

12. Let a copy of this order be made available to learned Standing counsel by 2:00 p.m.

7. Today, Shri Rahul Agarwal, along with Shri Varad Nath, have appeared for respondent no.4. Parties have been heard at some length.

8. Consequently, on the suggestion of the Court both sides 5 agreed that in the best interest of the parties before the Court as also the grand children of the petitioners and the children of the respondent nos.4 and 5, the matter may be settled outside the Court. As to mediation, learned counsel for the parties have proposed that the matter may be referred to Hon'ble Mr. Justice (retired) Vineet Saran, [Judge Supreme Court of India]. It has been orally intimated that they have taken consent of the learned mediator. In view of the above statement made at the bar, formal consent is dispensed with.

9. It has been further informed that the parties may be required to appear before the learned mediator after 09.07.2024. Accordingly, let the petitioners and private- respondents appear before the learned mediator on 12.07.2024 at the time and convenience of the learned mediator to be obtained by learned counsel for the parties and informed to the parties, accordingly.

10. As to his terms, it is left open to the learned mediator to settle the same with the only stipulation that both sets of parties will bear the expenses and fees equally. All disputes that may exist between the parties including as to their businesses, residence, immovable and movable property etc. may remain subject matter of the mediation.

11. We also leave it open to the discretion of the learned mediator to ensure the presence of the daughter of the petitioners, to resolve any issue or to allow the resolution to be more concrete, as may not give rise to any other or further disputes between the parties.

12. In the meanwhile, both the sides shall maintain status quo with respect to their immovable and movable properties. The business that may be in existence may continue to be run as today.

13. As to further arrangements that may be required to ensure peaceful co-existence of the parties pending mediation, it was earlier proposed (by us) that the petitioners and the respondents may continue to reside on different floors of the same house. In absence of consent available at this stage, we leave that issue also to be considered by the learned mediator, if required.

14. Arrangements provided by the last order for police protection may continue to exist till the next date of listing. Office may provide a copy of the report of the Committee (received today), to the learned mediator by 12.07.2024.

15. List this case on 18.10.2024. 6

6. Learned Mediator has made all efforts to help the parties reach an amicable settlement to what primarily remains the family dispute between the parents and their son and daughter- in-law. The interim report and final report of learned Mediator are on the record.

7. At the same time, the dispute continues to exist in some form or the other. In that regard, both learned counsel for the parties submit that some more efforts are being made by the parties to seek settlement outside the Court and at the same time they do admit that they were unable to reach a final and amicable settlement with the help of the learned Mediator.

8. At this stage, Shri Anil Tiwari states that petitioners may, therefore, be permitted to approach the District Magistrate and/ or the Prescribed Authority under the Uttar Pradesh Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 and U.P. Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2014, within a period of two weeks from today.

9. Subject to such compliance being made by the petitioners, the respondents herein may be issued notices in those proceedings. The parties undertake to cooperate. Such proceedings, if initiated, may be concluded within a period of three months, without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court, while passing this and earlier orders in these proceedings.

10. For a period of four months, i.e., till 15th July, 2025, interim protection provided vide order dated 05.07.2024 shall continue.

11. However, if petitioners fail to institute those proceedings, as indicated above, the interim order shall lapse after a period 7 of two weeks.

12. The report called by the order dated 03.07.2024 be retained in sealed cover. No copies are required to be issued to the parties as that record was called solely only for the assistance of the Court and not by way of evidence to be lead by the parties.

13. All issues of facts may remain to be established on the strength of evidence that may be led before the appropriate authority.

14. With these observations/ directions, the present petition is disposed of finally. Order Date :- 17.2.2025 Mustaqeem. (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary, J.) (S. D. Singh, J.) MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad